Assets in Scope
274127 sites
MSB · MSSB · DB across the BNE estate
Condition Assessed
18869%
188 of 274 inspected to date
Assets At Risk
8230%
Condition grade 4–5 · renewal required
Immediate Safety Defects
11Action now
Live findings flagged for make-safe
Avg Condition Grade
2.95Mid-life
Weighted across inspected sample
Pre-AS3000:2018 Assets
71%Legacy
Predate current wiring / AS61439
20-yr CAPEX Forecast
$14.2MRenewal
$6.8M front-loaded in first 5 years
Annual OPEX
$0.42M/yr
Maintenance, testing & inspection
Condition Grade Distribution
Appendix B · 1–5 scaleCondition Confidence
Programme
5 stages · 100%Asset Mix by Type
Top Recurring Defects
% of inspected boards
Condition basis: Visual-only assessment per Appendix C proforma. Each asset graded 1 (Very Good) – 5 (Very Poor) with a condition-confidence flag (Inspected / Partially inspected / Assumed). Degradation profile and remaining useful life derived from grade, age, environment and work-order history. No electrical testing performed — follow-up testing program recommended separately.
Condition by Asset Type
stacked grade 1–5Condition by Era Built
aging signalRemaining Useful Life
Renewal demand horizon across the inspected populationRUL < 2 yrs
47Urgent
Plan renewal now
RUL 2–5 yrs
88Near-term
Programme into 5-yr CAPEX
RUL 5–10 yrs
96Mid-term
Monitor & maintain
RUL > 10 yrs
43Sound
Routine maintenance only
Grade Definitions
BAC condition grading scale — Appendix B| Grade | Condition | Description | Count | % of sample |
|---|
Risk Matrix
likelihood × consequence · count of assets
Low
Medium
High
Extreme
Criticality Profile
service impact of failure
Critical assets (terminals, data centres, airside lighting reticulation) carry the highest consequence of failure. 18 grade 4–5 boards sit on critical supplies — these dominate the near-term capital priority.
Key Risk Themes
Systemic non-conformances driving the AMP recommendations| ID | Risk / Non-conformance | Driver | Assets | Likelihood | Consequence | Rating |
|---|
Rip & Replace
68$9.1M
Beyond economic refurbishment
Refurbish / Modify
95$3.6M
Safely upgrade in situ
Retain & Maintain
111$1.5M
Routine lifecycle only
Spare Capacity
38%Constrained
Boards able to accept new circuits
20-Year CAPEX Forecast
$M by year · renewal + upgradeRip & replaceRefurbish / modifyCompliance upgrade
5-Year Itemised Spend
detailed CAPEX + OPEXPrioritised Capital Works
Top renewal candidates by risk-adjusted priority| Priority | Asset | Location | Type | Grade | Recommendation | Est. cost | Window |
|---|
Stage 1 — Gap Analysis. Comparison of the 2015 AMP and current data against ISO 55001 and the BAC AMP template. Highlights missing information crucial to a defensible plan and value-add items for BAC consideration.
Data Complete
9
Information sets received & sufficient
Partial / Stale
6
Needs refresh or field verification
Critical Gaps
4
Blocking — RFI raised with BAC
Gap Register
Status vs ISO 55001 information requirements| Information set | Source | Status | AMP impact |
|---|
A worked example of the Stage deliverable formats Empower3D would produce for the AMP — condition assessment proforma, asset register extract, risk register and capital works outputs. Illustrative content for demonstration.